OASIS Open Data Protocol (OData) TCIcon indicating the project type

OASIS Open Data Protocol (OData) TC

Uploaded image for project: 'OASIS Open Data Protocol (OData) TC'
  1. OASIS Open Data Protocol (OData) TC
  2. ODATA-299

Should Duration be renamed DayTimeDuration in anticipation that we may wish to add YearMonthDuration at a later point?

    Details

    • Type: Improvement
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: V4.0_WD01
    • Fix Version/s: V4.0_WD01
    • Component/s: CSDL XML
    • Labels:
      None
    • Environment:

      [Closed]

    • Proposal:
      Hide

      Close with no action.

      The general consensus in naming this "Duration" was that the likelihood of adding yearMonthDuration in the future was low enough that we should optimize for simplicity in the more common dayTimeDuration by calling it simply Duration.

      Accepted: https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/48622/odata-meeting-30_on-20130321-minutes.html#odata-299

      Show
      Close with no action. The general consensus in naming this "Duration" was that the likelihood of adding yearMonthDuration in the future was low enough that we should optimize for simplicity in the more common dayTimeDuration by calling it simply Duration. Accepted: https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/48622/odata-meeting-30_on-20130321-minutes.html#odata-299

      Description

      XML schema defines both dayTimeDuration and yearMonthDuration.

      If we anticipate that we may wish to add CSDL support for YearMonthDuration later, then perhaps Duration should be renamed to DayTimeDuation now.

      (Note for comparison how we renamed Point to GeographyPoint, since there is also GeometryPoint)

        Attachments

          Activity

          Hide
          Permalink
          mikep Michael Pizzo (Inactive) added a comment -

          We had a long discussion on exactly this issue when we added Duration.

          The general consensus was that the likelihood of adding yearMonthDuration in the future was low enough that we should optimize for simplicity in the more common dayTimeDuration by calling it simply Duration.

          Show
          mikep Michael Pizzo (Inactive) added a comment - We had a long discussion on exactly this issue when we added Duration. The general consensus was that the likelihood of adding yearMonthDuration in the future was low enough that we should optimize for simplicity in the more common dayTimeDuration by calling it simply Duration.

            People

            • Assignee:
              Unassigned
              Reporter:
              evan.ireland.2 Evan Ireland
            • Watchers:
              0 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: